

Volume 24, 2: 2023

NEW FORMS OF FASCISM

Roland Theuas DS. Pada

University of Santo Tomas, Philippines

This paper covers the idea of fascism in the light of new and emerging
technologies as well as the current ubiquity of its use. I draw my
inspiration for this paper from the constant use of the word "fascist" to
denote opposition to a group or personal stance on socio-political issues.
My attempt to look at new forms of fascism is guided by the original
concept of fascism espoused by Mussolini's Doctrine of Fascism. I also
attempt to frame the conditions of the new forms of fascism in the context
of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. This context undergirds the current
propaganda model of media institutions that have shifted their operations
to the Internet. I argue in this paper that current media platforms that
operate under the BUMMER principle provide a potent breeding pool for
new forms of fascism that are reliant on ideologies as opposed to
authoritarian figures. These conditions, as I argue in this paper, force us
to rethink our current entanglement with democratic systems that are
entrenched in representative iterations. As a conclusion to this paper, I
argue the strong need for exploring an increased degree of participation
of individuals through direct forms of democracy, increased scrutiny of
media institutions, and the exploration of current and existing
technologies to undergird direct democratic participation.

Keywords: Authoritarianism, BUMMER, The Fourth Industrial

Revolution, New forms of fascism

INTRODUCTION

The ubiquity of the word "fascism" has gathered a certain degree of resonance
in campaigns ranging from political conflicts to issues of racial discrimination. A
typical unpacking of the concept of fascism itself has proven difficult, and the task is
rife with perils such as drawing the ire of a certain group or marginalizing the cause of
other identities. As much as I do not have a horse in the race for any causes or political
brands to endorse my paper inspects how contemporary social practices generate these
fasces or bundles to the point of critical mass. With this intention in mind, I would like
to direct the discussion to the original Doctrine of Fascism as it was conceived by
Giovanni Gentile and Benito Mussolini (1933). Fascism is the conception of a "group-
first" or "nation-first" ideology that tries to transcend the political limitations of
socialism and capitalism. While the Gentilian-Mussolinian conception of fascism is

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy ISSN 2244-1875

Vol. 24, Number 2, June 2023
 NEW FORMS OF FASCISM 329

critical of liberalism, socialism, and democracy, it remains surprisingly open to these

ideologies if the emphasis on collectivism is preserved. Mussolini (1933, 20) writes:

Given that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism,

Liberalism, and Democracy, it does not necessarily follow that the
twentieth century must also be a century of Socialism, Liberalism and
Democracy: political doctrines pass, but humanity remains; and it may
rather be expected that this will be a century of authority, a century of the
Left, a century of Fascism. For if the nineteenth century was a century of
individualism (Liberalism always signifying individualism), it may be
expected that this will be a century of collectivism, and hence the century
of the State. It is a perfectly logical deduction that a new doctrine can
utilize all the still vital elements of previous doctrines.

What I find fascinating here is that there is a fundamental effort in the doctrine
that resonates with other ideologies. While this is not my resounding praise or
recommendation of the practice of fascism, it does present a clearer picture of how we
can understand fascism beyond the usual scope of authoritarianism, racism, and bizarre
cults of personalities. Moreover, Gentilian-Mussolinian fascism presents certain
qualities that are manifested in contemporary "fasces" or groups. What is important in
this original use of the word fascism is the emphasis on the "group" and "action." The
main difference between Gentillian-Mussolinian fascism and contemporary
manifestations of fascism is that the figure of authority is no longer necessary to bind
the fasces together. One can imagine, in this case, a Milgram experiment (1963)
without the man in the lab coat insisting on the continuance of the experiment or a
Stanford Prison (2007) experiment without a warden.
The key ingredient in this contemporary form of fascism is the emergence of
new and unrealized consequences of technologies in the Fourth Industrial Revolution.
The general ubiquity and necessity of technologies, ranging from devices that are
constantly connected to the internet to social networks that are managed by an efficient
algorithm. These technologies create a fertile ground for cultivating fasces without
resorting to authority figures to control or dictate the goal or objective of the group.
While an authority or a figurehead might be involved in this process, they are no longer
necessary for the organization of the groups or fasces. The way that these groups or
fasces are organized is completely autonomous; they are neither coerced nor forced to
congregate into an ideological singularity. Through social networks, this behavior is
amplified and encouraged by automated algorithms whose designed purpose is to
maximize user engagement and maximize advertising exposure. The effect of these
automated systems is divisive. Following basic behavioral principles, users will be
encouraged to avoid negative engagements with other users and seek positive and
affirmative engagements with like-minded users, which generates a tribal effect.
Parties or fasces are encouraged to band together and engage their enemies to advance
their cause. This provides plenty of opportunities for social networks to monetize this
behavior by encouraging conflict and maximizing user engagement. Engagement will,
in turn, generate more income for the social network through advertising and, at the

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy ISSN 2244-1875

Vol. 24, Number 2, June 2023
330 ROLAND THEUAS DS. PADA

same time, fulfill the needs of its users to reinforce their tribal affinity and combat fend
off their enemies.
Certain nuances are omitted in this simplification of contemporary fasces. This
I intend to cover in the succeeding sections of this paper. To further elaborate on the
contemporary form of fascism, I will divide my discussion into three sections. The first
section of my paper will be devoted to the discussion of fascism in the context of the
Fourth Industrial Revolution. In this section, I will discuss the technological, political,
and economic underpinning of fascism that is enabled by the protected status of private
institutions and disempowered government institutions. I also include a discussion of
anomie that guides the behavior of private institutions involved in social networks. The
second section of my paper will cover issues involving the automation of fasces, how
automated systems can curate ideological/tribal groups, and how algorithms react to
the interests and engagements of their users. The third section of this paper will involve
some of the nuances that revolve around the curation of fasces, such as the utilization
of artificial users and bots to influence the trajectories of automated systems and the
homogenization of choices in these social networks. I conclude the paper by revisiting
Honneth's six conditions of social integration in Freedom's Right (2014) and that is
"The members of society who supplement each other in their communicative exchange
of views must feel that the products of their will formation are effective enough to be
practiced in social reality" (Honneth 2014, 304).

FASCISM AND THE FOURTH INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION

Unpacking the idea of fascism as an ideology is rife with hermeneutic issues and
contextual nuances. There is always a strong connotation that fascism ought to be
connected to an authoritarian or dictatorial figure that buttresses an entire fascist
movement. While this tendency is usually attributed to the aftermath of the Second
World War with figures such as Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini, there is very little
to gain in understanding the contemporary workings of fascism if it merely focuses on
an authoritarian or dictator paradigm. By retaining the connotation that fascist
movements are entirely dependent on the figurehead represented by the authority or
the dictator, it is possible to lose track of the mechanisms of fascist movements and
their ever-growing implementation in various societies.
For us to deal with this issue, we need to look back to Mussolini's The Political
and Social Doctrine of Fascism (1933) since the concept itself was his invention. We
have to remember that Mussolini's foundational doctrine of fascism is neither fixated
on a political stance (liberal, right, left, socialism, capitalism, etc.) nor is it concerned
with class struggles or class conflict; instead, it insists that:

Fascism desires the State to be a strong and organic body, at the

same time reposing upon broad and popular support. The Fascist State
has drawn into itself even the economic activities of the nation, and,
through the corporative social and educational institutions created by it,
its influence reaches every aspect of the national life and includes,
framed in their respective organizations, all the political, economic and

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy ISSN 2244-1875

Vol. 24, Number 2, June 2023
 NEW FORMS OF FASCISM 331

spiritual forces of the nation. A State which reposes upon the support
of individuals who recognize its authority, are continually conscious of
its power, and are ready at once to serve it, is not the old tyrannical State
of the medieval lord nor has it anything in common with the absolute
governments either before or after 1789 (Mussolini 1933, 24).

On a related note, fascism for Mussolini (1933, 16) is against the subjugation of the
individual to the state, which ironically is a very constructive criticism of
contemporary democracies:

Fascism denies, in democracy, the absurd conventional untruth of

political equality dressed out in the garb of collective irresponsibility and the
myth of "happiness" and indefinite progress. But, if democracy may be
conceived in diverse forms – that is to say, taking democracy to mean a state
of society in which the populace is not reduced to impotence in the State –
Fascism may write itself down as "an organized, centralized and
authoritative democracy."

Mussolini (1933, 21), however, is consistent with his insistence on the authority of the
state since it represents the interest of the people:

The foundation of fascism is the conception of the State, its character,

its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in
comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be
conceived of in their relation to the state.

Although Mussolini does not mention Hobbes, there is a strong affinity between
the doctrine of fascism to the representation of the will of the people in the Leviathan
(Hobbes 1996). Two elements can be derived from this affinity, the first one being that
there is a strong claim that the will of individuals is amplified through the state or its
Leviathanesque figure.1 The second affinity is that the impetus to empower and give
rise to authority is derived from the longing of the people for a revolution for Mussolini
(1933, 23), while for Hobbes (1996, 144), it is to fight off a common enemy.
A key element in the development of fascism as an ideology is its commitment
to action for a certain cause. This active element, combined with the unity espoused
by the group, collective, or state, is the strength of fascism for its cause. With the
growing historical suspicion of authoritarian figures, there has been a growing
emphasis on reducing the power of the state or its associated authority figures. The
wide historical adoption of democratic forms of government has reduced the
possibilities of an authoritarian regime continuing its hold on power in most
contemporary democracies. While authoritarian regimes continue to exist, they are
mostly isolated cases that are rapidly swaying to the advantages of democracy. The
measures adopted by most democratic regimes usually come in the form of limiting
the terms of the power of its leader, limiting the duration of leadership, and the option
of allowing its constituents to legally depose their leader. This can be observed in John

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy ISSN 2244-1875

Vol. 24, Number 2, June 2023
332 ROLAND THEUAS DS. PADA

Locke's Two Treatises of Government (2003), where the dissolution of the

commonwealth is seen as a necessary product of the dissolution of society and also of
the government (Locke 2003, 194). Locke includes many circumstances in which a
commonwealth is dissolved, specifically in the abuse of power by its leaders, such as
the disruption of the legislature and electoral fraud (Locke 2003, 195), neglect of duty
to maintain peace and order (Locke 2003, 196), and the necessity for establishing a
new government or commonwealth (Locke 2003, 197). These principles had become
a fundamental guide to most democracies insofar as they limit the degree and extent
of power in rulers. Much of these limitations revolve around the figure of leadership
and limit the scope of fascism by restricting the persistence of a possible authoritarian
figure. While this might generally reduce authoritarian power within the state, it does
not preclude the dismantling of ideological persistence that led to the use of
authoritarianism. In other words, if our understanding of fascism is limited to the scope
of authoritarian figures, the actual scope of fascism is taken out of the optics of critical
discourse.
New forms of fascism emerge from this limited scope of critical discourse when
authoritarian figures are always at the center of critique. Much like how we lose track
of small and insignificant details of history in exchange for monolithic figures, our
perception of fascism is likewise reduced to the myopia of a figure-centric critic. An
authoritarian figure can be deposed, ousted, and subject to a revolt, but this does not
necessarily dismantle the ideological fuel that drove groups to band together and
elevate such a figure into a position of power. The power of an authoritarian figure lies
in their capacity to utilize ideological principles that rouse the group or the fasces to a
certain cause. The authoritarian figure is merely an instrumental knot that binds
individuals into fasces; they can be sacrificed for the cause, they can be ousted by the
opposition as a martyr for the fasces, and they can be discarded if the fasces requires a
new figurehead to further entangle individuals to the cause. Adorno, Frenkel-
Brunswik, Levinson, and Sanford's sociological study on The Authoritarian
Personality (1950) provides some early glimpses into the nature of fascism in its new
forms by investigating the sociological traits of potential fasces. Through their study
of respondents, Adorno's team (1950, 2) attempted to find traits and characteristics that
may create fascistic tendencies due to ideological tendencies. The context of their
study, however, has to be understood in the prevailing post-war discourse on anti-
semitism and racial prejudice. The irony of Adorno's attempt to understand prejudice
in this regard involves creating typologies and generalizations about individual
subjects based on their ideological tendencies. Adorno argues that the typological
nature of their study is somewhat justified by the necessity of providing "weapons" to
counter the "potential threat of the fascist mentality" (Adorno et al. 1950, 748).
While I think there are some lapses and anachronisms in Adorno's study that
might not be ethically accepted in the current times, there are certain aspects of the
study that point us in the correct direction of understanding fascism. Individual
characteristics, as Adorno (1950, 747) would say, are confusingly diverse. Any
ideological tendencies or psychological traits can lead to authoritarian tendencies (be
it in support or as the authority) as long as there is resistance to ideological scrutiny
and critique. The persistence of an unassailable ideology is a hallmark of a fascistic
tendency. The belief and the blind faith towards the correctness and validity of an

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy ISSN 2244-1875

Vol. 24, Number 2, June 2023
 NEW FORMS OF FASCISM 333

ideology is the knot that binds the fasces together. An unassailable ideology provides
a stable platform for individuals to form fasces and impose their will on other
individuals. For this reason, I think that characterology and typologies are bound to
fail to identify the traits of fascistic tendencies in individuals since there is a diversity
of traits that can be linked to fascism. Ideologies provide justification and motivation
for individuals to act as a unified 'bundle' to pursue a cause or a purpose. Be it a
justification for expanding the Spanish territories in the age of exploration or holy war
against the Muslims in the Crusades, the justification of a cause that binds individuals
together is a product of an unassailable ideological reification. Lest we begin accusing
individuals who pursue animal rights and practice vegetarianism as a fascistic
character, Adorno's typology should be abandoned to understand new and emerging
forms of fascism.
The resistance to dialectical engagement that leads to a critique of ideology is
fundamental to the bundling of fasces. When individuals find kinship for a cause and
find no resistance to their ideological motives, the possibility of fascism emerges.
While the obvious solution to this fundamental tendency of fascism is a dialectic of
ideologies, the irony is that the current condition of communication seems to amplify
fascistic tendencies. With the proliferation of the internet, the hopeful expectation that
we have of dialectical engagements of ideologies. However, despite the ubiquity and
availability of the internet, the resistance against critique and the tendency to bundle
fasces has become more prevalent. With the growing necessity of connectedness
through the internet, the fourth industrial revolution has amplified the effect of
ideological reification by automating the categorization of individuals into arbitrary
groups for the sake of advertising and data harvesting.
The necessity of connectivity is part of the condition of the Fourth Industrial
Revolution. Schwab (2016, 78) argues that with the connectivity offered by the Fourth
Industrial Revolution, the demand for realizing aspirations in life and the strong tug of
the labor market require individuals to adapt to an on-demand economy. Moreover,
Schwab (2016, 38) emphasizes that "Human needs and desires are infinite, so the
process of supplying them should also be infinite," meaning that despite the very
disruptive nature of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, there is an alluring possibility of
growth in these disruptions. In other words, the disruptive nature of technological
changes, coupled with the increasing demand for automation to increase efficiency,
would inevitably force individuals to conform to the platforms that connect them to
like-minded people who may not necessarily offer a dialectical challenge for their
well-entrenched ideologies. With the strong demand for efficiency and a highly
reactive market that kowtows to disruptive demands that are necessitated by an epoch
governed by trends and fashionable ideologies. Honneth (2014, 301) notes that in
contrast to traditional media, the internet's offer of freedom is a double-edged sword:

Ideally, when we read a newspaper still committed to its task of

informing the public, or when we watch a politically informative
television program, the spectrum of presented opinions should ensure that
our judgments are tested in terms of their universalizability, and thus only
flow into the process of will-formation in this rationally cleansed form.

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy ISSN 2244-1875

Vol. 24, Number 2, June 2023
334 ROLAND THEUAS DS. PADA

By contrast, in the internet forums of the World Wide Web, where rather
diffuse publics tend to lack even the most rudimentary controls on
rationality – not only because it is possible to cease communication at any
time, but also because the anonymous interlocutors need not necessarily
respond. Certainly, this is less true of the highly-specialized web
communities in which the required expertise and the necessary
commitment help establish comparable rational constraints, but it is all
the more true for the overflowing internet communities that know no such
access restrictions and in which the most absurd positions can circulate
without comment. In these places, will-formation is not only amorphous
and free from any pressures of rational justification, but it also offers
space for all sorts of apocryphal and anti-democratic opinions and
movements.

The growing connectivity between individuals in the ubiquitous nature of the

internet does not necessarily translate into the proliferation of a democratically open
and rational venue for discourse. The allure of options and autonomy only translates
to further obscurity and inaccessibility. As opposed to the earlier practices of network
connectivity through privately operated BBS (Bulletin Board System) and privately
maintained internet forums, contemporary platforms for discourse are mainly operated
through platforms that rely on advertisement revenue and business models that thrive
on mandatory data-harvesting. While user-maintained forums on the internet still exist
to this day, they do not have the similar reach and necessity of use offered by pervasive
platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. The loss of stake on the level of
the individual users, therefore, leads to the massive adoption of these communicative
platforms, which inevitably leads to users accepting the arbitrary policies, restrictions,
and lockouts from these platforms. The video streaming site YouTube, for example,
controls a massive amount of content where users are funneled to watch their
algorithm-based recommendations while content creators are forced to comply with
arbitrary policies on what kind of content to publish. In Paul Lewis's Article in The
Guardian (2018), The ex-Google software engineer, Guillaume Chaslot, developed
software that scrutinizes the favourability of YouTube's algorithm to certain content
and found out that the Clinton-Trump campaign in the 2016 US elections was heavily
favoring Trump's campaign (2018). Whether this favorable algorithm for the Trump
campaign is a good or a bad outcome is something that is up for the reader to decide.
What is apparent, however, is the massive influence that a ubiquitous platform such as
YouTube has over ideological discourse and the possibility of critique.
The need for efficiency and profitability drives the internet to seek unified
platforms where users are profiled, categorized, and consolidated in their respective
demographic. Lanier (2010, 10) notes that this tendency is a product of standardization
in computing systems that creates a 'lock-in' phenomenon. The lock-in phenomenon is
a product of highly efficient and industry-adopted systems that are ubiquitous and
necessary in the operation of these systems. Much like the MIDI standard in music
digitalization or the wide adoption of UNIX-based computing systems, Lanier (2010,
12) fears how human expression can be inevitably "ingrained into the interlocked

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy ISSN 2244-1875

Vol. 24, Number 2, June 2023
 NEW FORMS OF FASCISM 335

software designs of the internet." Lanier, in Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social
Media Accounts (2018, 56), further remarks that the divisive nature of algorithms in
social media platforms has created "filter bubbles" that categorize them for prolonged
engagements on these platforms. The general thrust of Lanier's arguments in this book
is to argue that social media platforms use the "BUMMER" model. BUMMER is
Lanier's acronym for "Behaviors of Users Modified and Made into an Empire for
Rent" (2018, 24). This acronym depicts current and prevalent social media platforms
that are engaged in behavioral modifications of their users to entice prolonged
engagement for advertisement and data harvesting purposes. It manipulates its users
to become constantly engaged in the platform to allow advertising and, at the same
time, gather personal information to target its users. BUMMER platforms are,
therefore, able to use user-generated content and, at the same time, gather information
from its users for targeted advertising.
This condition is exploited by the BUMMER systems since it provides
immediate feedback to the user to provide the illusion of communicative exchange.
With the condition of social media platforms where users can be faked and the perusal
of communication is minimal, the proliferation of fasces occurs at a very rapid pace.
While the responsibility of allowing these group mentalities to thrive lies with the
social media platforms, the possibility of this continued proliferation lies with the users
themselves. As long as users continue to provide BUMMER platforms with content,
the system will continue to thrive and sell out to interested parties for the right price.
With the homogeneity of content and an occasional tension or drama from other users
with different opinions, BUMMER platforms can constantly tweak user engagement
to proliferate advertisements and collect data from its users.
For example, in the Cambridge-Analytica scandal from Facebook, Isaak and
Hanna (2018, 56) raised ethical issues and questions about user privacy when
Facebook granted access to more than 87 million users worth of personal information.
Combined with the optimization of advertisements, personalization of user
experiences through algorithms, and the ubiquity of internet access through IoT
(Internet of Things) (Isaak and Hanna 2018, 57), users are constantly bombarded with
customized content that is tailored to their personal preferences. The danger with this
kind of unfettered access to similarly-minded user-generated content is that it amplifies
already-existing biases, ideologies, and in some cases, prejudice. This kind of user
engagement is also rife with influence from parties that have access to greater funding
sources that can extend the reach of their content to targeted audiences that are
receptive to political parties or institutions. At the onset, it seems that there is a pathway
for a democratic and critical discourse since anyone can proliferate and participate in
a discourse where ideologies are scrutinized and subject to critique. In practice,
however, the disparity in resources would still mean that wealthier organizations and
institutions will still overpower individuals in terms of the production of content,
advertising reach, and infrastructure.
We are reminded by Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent (1988) that the
existence of elite domination of media allows powerful organizations and institutions
to filter which kind of information is worthy of proliferation (1988, 2). Moreover,
Chomsky (1988, 9). also notes that media companies are likewise influenced by the
pressures of shareholders and funders that want to increase profitability. With the

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy ISSN 2244-1875

Vol. 24, Number 2, June 2023
336 ROLAND THEUAS DS. PADA

emergence of the internet as a new venue for various forms of media, the demands of
maintaining an infrastructure for communications remain. While maintaining radio
and television stations, manufacturing of media through different technologies, and the
logistics of distributing printed materials were costs attributed to traditional forms of
media; the internet is likewise maintained by necessary operational resources. A
website requires the necessary hardware and software to remain connected to the
internet, technical personnel to maintain and operate the site, and people that would
maintain relevancy in a constantly connected world. While connecting to the internet
might seem affordable or accessible to most people, maintaining its constant function
is complicated and expensive. In the same manner, despite all the shift of venue for
media companies, Chomsky's (1988, 14) observation still holds for the internet: "The
advertiser's choices influence media prosperity and survival."
The growth of the Internet generally depended on the constant allure of
advertising opportunities to institutions and organizations. Advertising allowed the
internet to thrive by providing incentives to content creators, site owners, and internet-
related infrastructures to grow with the advertising demands. Companies like Google
has evolved from search engine provider for Internet users to massive advertising
platform that incentivizes content creation as a venue for advertising. Lanier notes that
this growth in advertising eventually led to practicing content matching, which
categorized users into a locked-in system, much like how MIDI can standardize the
representation of notes in the computing world (2010, 13). This ability to categorize
and standardize a method of profiling representations of users is made very apparent
in the change of name by Facebook to Meta. Not only does the word 'Meta' represent
an all-encompassing platform for the internet, but it also represents the product that
Meta delivers to its business stakeholders: metadata gathered from its users.

FASCES AND IDEOLOGY: A CASE OF REIFICATION

With the increasing growth of monolithic social media providers on the internet,
the wide adoption and ubiquity of these platforms, and the necessity of adopting
constant connectivity with the internet, the possibility of critical discourse has become
a breeding pool for fascistic practices. In BUMMER platforms, like-minded users are
grouped via algorithm and are constantly reinforced to interact in their respective echo
chambers. The blind faith towards ideologies espoused in these echo chambers creates
a breeding ground for new forms of fascism, fascism without an authoritarian figure.
While authoritarian figures are initially useful for fabricating an ideology, proliferation
of ideology, and the implementation of ideology, however, if the ideological faith of
the individuals in the fasces is already established, the figure is no longer necessary to
the cause of the fasces. Ideologies can bind people together, and in some cases, the
knot that holds them together is tight enough to maintain the strength of the fasces
without a leader. The fascination and alacrity of a vigil that is usually employed for
potential authoritarian figures are often confused with a knot that binds the fasces
together. The leader of the authoritarian figure is simply a stick in the bundle; if one is
pulled out of the bundle, another can always step in and fortify the group. The knot

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy ISSN 2244-1875

Vol. 24, Number 2, June 2023
 NEW FORMS OF FASCISM 337

that I speak of is ideology, and it has taken a more persistent form with the conditions
of social interactions that we have at the moment.
For the sake of clarity, it would be necessary to define what kind of form fascism
has in these contemporary conditions. I like to take the liberty to define fascism as an
ideologically-driven group that seeks normativity without recourse to dialectical
intervention and critique. No longer should the idea of fascism revolve around an
authoritarian figure since the fabrication, proliferation, and implementation of
ideologies can function without an authoritarian figure. For example, Neo-Nazism
does not need Adolf Hitler to constantly guide them or reinforce and mobilize the
fasces into action. Nick Ryan, in an article in The Independent (1998), covers the story
of the group Combat 18,2 for example, is a contemporary Neo-Nazi group that was
formed by the British National Party as a response to anti-fascist groups. Fasces such
as Combat 18, serves as an example that ideological fixation can give rise to new forms
of fascism. Nazism and even Neo-Nazism are not strictly the only avenues for these
new forms of fascism. Fascism can take many forms, including movements against
fascism that can have fascistic tendencies to force the normativity of their ideologies
without recourse to discourse or dialectical engagement. Denton, in his review of
Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook and From Fascism to Populism in History (2021),
states that ANTIFA and Black Lives Matter movement is "…not a movement to trifle
with. They are organized internationally and will not hesitate to use violence to achieve
their ends" (Denton 2021, 205). It should be noted that new forms of fascism are no
longer confined to either Nazism or anti-Semitism; its expansive properties can affect
all forms of ideologies that are given a protected status due to their cause. A quality
that should also be understood is that ideological imperviousness is a proper indication
of the rise of new forms of fascism. If an ideology cannot be assailed or is given
protected status, then it can lead to blind faith and obedience by those who are locked-
in to its cause. These types of ideological causes can have an effect on the future
possibilities of discourse. Lamentably, new forms of fascism can forcibly implement
normative values without recourse to critical dialectical discourse to justify any
normative claim. Be it a fight for a specific brand of democracy, the forcible
implementation of renewable energy in developing countries, or the use of a specific
currency for a necessary global resource, new forms of fascism can emerge from any
ideology that is not subject to critique. The true essence of a democratic civilization
lies in its capacity to provide avenues where an ideology could be proven wrong or
subject to revision. If an ideology is excluded from scrutiny, critique, and discourse,
then fascism will thrive without opposition. Even for the cause of order, prosperity,
and peace, the freedom to subject ideologies to critique is the only guarantee that an
ideology is truly worth pursuing. The compliance to an ideology should be freely and
rationally assented by individuals; otherwise, the ideology, in practice, is merely a
fascistic order that thrives on threats, violence, and moral decrepitude.

CONCLUSIONS: A RECOURSE TO A POSSIBILITY OF DEMOCRACY

If there is a possibility of a future where democracy is protected, and fascism is

thwarted, then we should remain vigilant about the possibility of monolithic

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy ISSN 2244-1875

Vol. 24, Number 2, June 2023
338 ROLAND THEUAS DS. PADA

ideological forms of reification. With the new forms of fascism that we encounter in
the contemporary forms of social interaction on the internet, there should be growing
concern about how democratic discourses should be implemented on prevailing
ideologies. A healthy democratic system should enable its populace to provide
individual voices for concerns that encompass its citizens. The irony of the
technological developments in the Fourth Industrial Revolution is that there seems to
be no clear attempt at revisiting the viability of representative democracies. The
indirect form of democratic participation in representative democracies means that
individuals are only able to address their concerns through a proxy figure. If
technologies exist that can connect people through computer networks, then the
justification for the continued use of representative democracy somehow becomes
moot. Since we live in a time where internet connectivity has become a necessity, there
would be very few excuses left for democratic nations to ignore direct forms of
democracy.
The questionable viability of representative democracies has to be addressed
when we look at the massive infrastructure capabilities of media organizations on the
internet. These media organizations have the capacity to consolidate and concentrate
influence on specific individuals or organizations. With the disparity of resources
between wealthy and powerful organizations, monological ideologies can remain
unchecked and unassailable. Chomsky's propaganda model of mass media reminds us
that these strategies and operative functions of manufacturing consent are still used by
powerful organizations despite the typical promises of connected and free-flowing
modes of communication on the Internet. While this paint a very bleak Black Mirror-
esque dystopian future for democracy, we must be aware that there have been plenty
of technological developments in the last decade that offer solutions to the growth of
new forms of fascism. For example, while blockchain technologies have offered
alternative currencies that are maintained and validated by their users, the same kind
of technology can be employed to allow individual citizens to participate directly in
democratic systems. Elections can be run entirely on a peer-to-peer validation of votes
through this technology. Government records can be maintained over this technology
with fewer risks of manipulation, redaction, and deletion from influential
organizations. Again, if it is possible to demand internet connectivity to individuals as
an economic necessity, I think that it would be likewise a possibility to demand this
technology to individuals as a necessity for participating in democratic processes.
The constant preoccupation of critics with the idea of authoritarianism must be
addressed to offer a counter-balance for the new forms of fascism. Instead of focusing
on individual figures, critics should begin to look at the ideological foundations of
these figures. Moreover, critics should consider that these figures are fungible
resources that are employed as mere figureheads for ideological causes that benefit
interested parties. Similar conditions from Chomsky's propaganda model and even
Lippmann's Public Opinion (1998, 248) from 1922 assert that consent from
democratic systems is subject to fabrications from external forces. If anything,
increased scrutiny should be placed upon media institutions because of their capacity
to manufacture consent in representative democracies. Like any business institution,
media companies are wholly dependent on the necessary economic resources required
for their operation and maintenance. With the constant dependency on economic

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy ISSN 2244-1875

Vol. 24, Number 2, June 2023
 NEW FORMS OF FASCISM 339

resources, these media institutions are susceptible to political and economic influences
from interested parties or organizations.
I offered in this essay the possible solutions that are within the reach of our
current technological state. In order to counteract the growth of the new forms of
fascism, there should be strong actual democratic participation from individuals within
a democratic society. This participation should no longer be limited by mere
representations from political figures since the current technological advances have
made it possible to further exploit the manufacture of consent through controlled and
targeted propaganda campaigns. The use of blockchain technology offers a workable
alternative to representative democracies by allowing individuals to participate directly
in decision-making processes and discourse. With the ubiquity of connectivity to the
internet as an economic necessity, I have argued that this necessity should also apply
to the demands of democracy in the form of direct participation. Through direct
participation, ideologies can be scrutinized and subject to critical discourse, reducing
the possibility of a protected and unassailable ideological foundation for the new forms
of fascism. My last proposal to staunch the growth of the new forms of fascism is a
renewed and increased scrutiny of media institutions as the propaganda engine of the
new forms of fascism. The change in technological trends did not necessarily translate
to the increased growth of democracy. On the contrary, it has increased the powerful
reach of media institutions that Lippmann and Chomsky have foretold. Media
institutions are the death knell of the future of democratic societies because of their
capacity to consolidate power through the protection and proliferation of ideologies.
When we begin to realize how the current democratic processes in representative
democracies are subject to the manipulations of media institutions, then we can begin
considering the possibility of direct democracy as the future of democratic societies.

NOTES

1. In the case of Hobbes, the sovereign or the eponymous Leviathan (1996)

becomes the manifestation of the will of the individual and therefore surrenders any
right to self-governance (1996, 114).
2. The name is derived from the letters A (1) and H (8), referring to Adolf Hitler.
(BBC, 2020)

REFERENCES

Adorno, Theodor., E. F.-B. 1950. The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper &
Brothers.
BBC. 2020. Germany bans Combat 18 as police raid neo-Nazi group. BBC News.
Aired on January 23, 2020. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-
europe-51219274
Denton, Donald. 2021. ANTIFA: The anti-Fascist handbook and from fascism to
populism in history. In Terrorism and Political Violence. pp. 205-208.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2021.1864970.

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy ISSN 2244-1875

Vol. 24, Number 2, June 2023
340 ROLAND THEUAS DS. PADA

Hobbes, Thomas. 1996. Leviathan. Edited by J.C.A. Gaskin. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Honneth, Axel. 2014. Freedom's right. Translated by J. Ganahl. Cambridge: Polity
Press.
Isaak, Jim and M. Hannah. 2018. User data privacy: Facebook, Cambridge Analytica,
and privacy protection. Computer, 51:8 56-59.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2018.3191268
Lanier, Jaron. 2010. You are not a gadget manifesto. New York: Alfred Knopf.
Lanier, Jaron. 2018. Ten arguments for deleting your social media accounts. New
York: Henry Holt and Company.
Lippmann, Walter. 1998. Public opinion. New Jersey: Macmillan Company.
Locke, John. 2003. Two treatises of government; A letter concerning human
toleration. Edited by I. Shapiro. New York: Yale University.
Milgram, Stanley. 1963. Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 67(4): 371-378.
Mussolini, Benito. 1933. The political and social doctrine of Fascism. Translated by
J. Soames. London: Hogarth Press.
Noam Chomsky, E. H. 1988. Manufacturing consent. New York: Pantheon Books.
Paul Lewis, E. M. 2018. How an Ex-YouTube insider investigated its secret algorithm.
The Guardian. San Francisco, USA. Posted on February 2, 2018. Retrieved from
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/feb/02/youtube-algorithm-
election-clinton-trump-guillaume-chaslot
Ryan, Nick. 1998. Combat 18: Memoirs of a street-fighting man. Independent. Posted
on February 1, 1990. Retrieved from https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-
entertainment/combat-18-memoirs-of-a-streetfighting-man-1142204.html
Schwab, Klaus. 2016. The Fourth Industrial Revolution. Geneva: World Economic
Forum.
Zimbardo, Philip. 2007. The Lucifer effect. New York: Random House.

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy ISSN 2244-1875

Vol. 24, Number 2, June 2023